CR/失业争论题-怀疑沸沸的解答

蓝皮书 Page 534 第139题
            

Questions 138-139 are based on the following.

Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.

139. Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population

(C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population

(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents

(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics

正确答案: B

(Record 13-02)沸沸思路: A 去掉rarely, weakens Sharon’s statement. 可能正确 B 去掉 not. 那么, If those 50 workers known by the person are located in the “geographically isolated segments of the population” , Sharon’s statement will also be weakened.

由于A 描述的是一个general的概念, 而B 描述的是”失业率的分配” 直接和原文相关, 所以B更正确.

这题在OG11里有详细的解释

76-77（黄皮）LZ可以去看一下。

想起NN携隐的一句话，CR是要知道ETS怎么推，而不是你怎么推，在没有完全熟悉ETS思路之前不要自己形成定势（原话我忘了，太离谱了请包涵）。

这道题让讨论argument的前提：

首先"argument"是什么？

“at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed”

前提：如果一个人认识50左右个工作人士

结论：这50人当中有1个或一个以上的人失业

请问A项可以影响哪个？可以影响推理过程吗？